[free652]

If theoretically a developer chose to develop something in Python in my company that would be an automatic no. There are multiple reasons:

You would add an another language to support from the development to the operational support like monthly security updates. And that's a major risk and most companies won't take it.

If you leave the company then the company may have potentially unsupported app with noone capable of supporting it.

And seriously why would you pick python? Why not perl? Why not ruby?

[sidlls]

The operational support you note is definitely something that should be evaluated, but if there is a "hard no" policy in place that is a negative indicator about the engineering organization to me.

Generally having a small number of implementation languages in use shouldn't be an issue. In fact, languages are tools and some are better suited than others to certain uses. If an organization supports products of even modest complexity odds are multiple languages and other technologies are required in order to make it work properly.

[icebraining]

You are making the unwarranted assumption that Python isn't already used in the company.

[paulddraper]

> And seriously why would you pick python? Why not perl? Why not ruby?

FWIW, Python is the 4th most popular language on the TIOBE index (after C, C++, Java). It's not likely that $COMPANY is already using Python than Ruby or Perl.

[detaro]

I don't think anyone claimed that there are no valid reasons to decline a request to use Python.